Measurement of multiple SARS-CoV-2 antibody titer after vaccination represents individual vaccine response and contributes to individually appropriate vaccination schedules

  1. Kenji Ota
  2. Satoshi Murakami
  3. Hiroshi Mukae
  4. Shigeru Kohno
  5. Katsunori Yanagihara

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

The SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) has become a game-changer in the COVID-19 crisis. Faster and wider coverage of vaccine supply is urgently needed, although vaccine supply is far from abundant in many countries and regions. There is no denying that Japan is vaccinating at a slower pace than in many other countries. At the end of April 2021, it had administered less than 2% of the population, according to the statistics website Our World in Data. 1 Single-dose vaccination may be considered to induce an adequate antibody response in individuals with prior infection, 2–5 which can lead to more effective vaccine distribution to people in serious need. However, multiple antibody responses in populations with various backgrounds, including prior COVID-19 infection, underlying diseases, and age, have not been investigated sufficiently. Due to the lack of antibody measurement data, antibody follow-up measurement recommendations have yet to be suggested. Accumulation of available data regarding quantitative antibody titer will lead to the establishment of personally customized schedules, including antibody follow-up, and will balance both faster delivery of vaccines and confirmation of effective vaccination.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2021.05.21.21257575: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Ethicsnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    No key resources detected.

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  2. Version published to 10.1101/2021.05.21.21257575v1 on medRxiv